Attention Whole Foods shoppers: Everyone hates you

I'm asking this following question genuinely.

Both the US & UK have an obesity problem where fatties are now a significant percentage of the population. I know this is because we eat too much and do less exercise than we used to BUT is it also to do with the growth hormones pumped into cattle, pigs and sheep?

The problem didn't really start until the early 1980's and prior to that time people still had sedentary jobs or didn't exercise, yet weren't the size of small cars as many are today. Just look at the tv shows of the time. People were much thinner, even lazy taxi drivers. So how come a lazy taxi driver of 1965 was only half the size of one today? Surely it can't be just lack of exercise. It seems we all got much fatter about the same time as growth hormones started to be pumped into cattle, or is it just a coincidence?

 

GC, I'd be skeptical of GH as the cause. First, GH is broken down by the gut of humans and not absorbed as as active molecule.

However, GH normally leads to secretion of IGF-1 in cows and humans, and that molecule can be absorbed intact. To know whether enough is absorbed to matter physiologically you might start by figuring out what your daily dose is, and compare that to normal secretion rates in humans. IGF-1 is, IIRC, in much higher concentration in cow milk than cow muscle.

It is not just lack of exercise that makes people fat, it is also caloric intake. Americans without a doubt stuff in more calories today than a generation ago. Another line of evidence suggesting that GH (or it's effector molecules) is unlikely to play an important role is the marked difference in obesity between different cultural groups.

 

I totally agree with you man.

 

So the fact that the UK McDonalds supersize meal is the same size as the US regular meal might show the larger portion sizes?And then don't you get bigger sizes now than the supersize deal?

And regarding cultural groups, how'd you mean? You're saying that richer people still eat the same meat with the hormones, but are not as likely to be as fat as poorer people of similar ages and backgrounds? So it's an education thing or a lifestyle issue or a bit of both?

Personally I put a heck of a lot of weight on doing the taxi job but since leaving I now do a daily 30 minute walk and the weight is dropping off. You don't have to be a gym member to lose weight. Just a gentle walk for 30 minutes every day works wonders. I started off doing 10 minutes and thought I was going to die, yet a few weeks after I was doing the 30 mins no worries. If anyone is considering losing weight, I'd say ignore the nonsense diets and just enjoy a daily walk.

 

Exactly.

Without a doubt. Your experience also points out the problem with comparing sedentary lifestyles of a generation ago with today -- with a bit of walking, or without any at all. In terms of energy expenditure the differences are really small, but the total effect on energy balance is quite apparent.

 

There are a lot of factors changing in terms of diet in the past few decades. It seems unlikely that any one is all encompassing.

I have seen studies that indicate that obesity is a cause of low exercise regimes, rather than a effect (at least in kids). Some thing to consider.

 

Organic = no pesticides on veggies/fruits and no growth hormones, no antibiotics, naturally grass fed and kept in free range conditions

Also, a home garden or a farm around the corner will keep the veggies/fruits longer on the stem and will only be picked ripened which gives the food so much more taste and texture.

 

They also care for their 'product' too. I recommend anyone who can buys locally as Scummer suggests. I buy my eggs produced by a local farmer who looks after his hens allowing them to range free. The price is the same or lower than the big companies, yet his eggs are really tasty and I mean really tasty.

Free-Range Eggs Yorkshire

 

we trade our neighbors veggies for eggs. i'm going to miss summer.

 

Before this latest study of organic foods nutrition, this was the general idea:

"Feeding soil with organic matter instead of other synthetic fertilizers results in an increase in nutrients in produce. Mineral and vitamin levels are much higher when the soil is organically taken care of. It isn’t too difficult of a grasp to see that food grown in healthier soil will result in healthier, more nutritious food, higher quality food. This has been proven time and time again..."​

It all depends on availability and cost. The scales are in your favor or they aren't. Organic makes sense on an individual level or it doesn't.

Do the best you can and don't get ulcers worrying about the rest.

 

In the past I recall seeing studies that came to that conclusion ,that organic is more nutritious.

 

Having been raised on a farm, I have a few clues. There is a lot more at play than just growth hormones. The food fed to animals is very much manufactured in many cases. Remember Mad Cow Disease got started when sheep remains were used a cow feed. (That should be an eye opener.) A vast amount of antibiotics are added. An immense amount of genetic engineering is in play to make the animal grow as fast as possible. There also is a lot of effort to ensure no strong natural muscle development occurs, only very fatty (tasty) and tender (weak) muscle is desired via any means possible. After that, taste enhancers and preservatives are added for consumption addiction. In the tradeoff between money and long term health effects on the population, the population has lost the battle completely.

Basically, the answer is a provisional yes.....but the growth hormones have a huge supporting cast.

 

My parents had a farm until the endless European legislation and laws made it unviable to continue a few years ago. Well, the lamb they produced was soo sweet and tender as they did things the old fashioned way; plenty of grass and care - dead simple. You'll know this, but the meat you get from the supermarket just doesn't taste like the good, proper, traditional farm meat. The same with the earlier post about the eggs. It isn't as profitable for the big boys where every single penny of profit matters, but proper, natural farm produced food (organic or at least not messed about with) tastes so much nicer and is definitely worth seeking out if you've never tried it. It doesn't have to cost much more or any more if you look in the right places.

 

locally we seem to be having a renaisance of owner operated restaurants purchasing direct from farmers, ranchers, and other small producers. they have been putting their skills to task creating local menus with local flavors at reasonable prices. with food inputs only being something around 20% of the tab, taking a 20% uptick only adds 4% to the tab and draws a much more loyal customer base that tends to tip better than the McDonalds crowd.

That said, my favorite is an Indian trailer, apptly named "G'Raj Mahal'. Local Lamb Korma. G'Raj Mahal Cafe

 

No. It wasn't. Organic is to do with no chemicals, no pesticides, artificial fertilizers, antibiotics. Idea that organic is more nutritious is peripheral at best.

 

There is a question of factory farming actually being profitable if regulations were enforced. The example I heard was with pig farms and their poop. I know that the run off from the pits causing some problems in N. Carolina rivers. Supposedly, if they were held to the same standards in waste management as, say an actual factory, traditional farming would beat them on price.

 

Obviously it was, or people wouldn't have thought it and there wouldn't have been a study that would disprove it.

 

This article is convincing.
400% more resveratrol in organic grapes.

Organic Food Has a Higher Nutrient Content — Bioneers

 

unfortunately, the general public will take this study to heart and may stop buying organic. but that is unlikely. this study i strongly suspect was funded by Monsanto, Dow Chemical and other factory food companies.

its like any study released. someone paid for it and only because someone wanted their agenda put out there.

We as a society take these studies way too seriously

 

It's simple: Do you want your food and veg sprayed with poisonous chemicals or not?

These chemicals are so unpleasant that the farm worker has to wear full protection gear. That nasty chemical is absorbed by the plant and then eaten by you. I guess they could argue the amounts are so small as to be insignificant, but then allergies and asthma are on the increase. How many times in the past have we been told certain chemicals or drugs are 100% safe only to find out 20 years later that they're not.

If you can afford organic food, buy it.

If you can't, then buy fresh food and wash it well where applicable.

Just avoid food that is full of all sorts of crap and often that is prepacked or prepared food. But it all comes down to personal choices and responsibilities.